You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@stdcxx.apache.org by Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com> on 2008/01/01 02:38:56 UTC
prototype of the "expected failures" enhancement (STDCXX-683)
The commit below implements an initial prototype of the "expected
failures" enhancement described in STDCXX-683. The prototype can
be viewed on the usual test result page:
http://people.apache.org/~sebor/stdcxx/results/builds
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=607788&view=rev
The new file, etc/config/xfail.txt, is intended to contain a list
of known failures in the test suite (including examples and locales).
The comments in the file explain how to make a failure in a component
as expected.
Let me know what you all think: questions, suggestions for changes,
or bug reports are all welcome!
Happy new year!
Martin
PS I've tested the changes with build logs on most platforms but I
forgot to include Windows. As usual, things are different there and
the results aren't quite satisfactory. I'll work on fixing those as
soon as I get a chance.
Re: prototype of the "expected failures" enhancement (STDCXX-683)
Posted by Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com>.
Mark Brown wrote:
> Martin,
>
> Most of the links to the log files are broken.
I see it, thanks. I'm working on a patch.
> They all point to files
> in http://people.apache.org/tmp/. Also, I'm not sure I understand how
> rows in the tables are supposed to be arranged now. If I recall, they
> used to be ordered alphabetically but after your change 26 comes
> before 23, and 23 before 27. Is that intended?
Definitely not. It's caused by the associative nature of awk arrays
that I forgot to take into account and missed in visual inspection
of the changed output. I'll fix that next. Sorry about both problems.
Martin
>
> 2 26.class.gslice 46230 162
> 5 23.deque.special 61465 1536
> 7 27_basic_ios 0 1
>
> -- Mark
>
> On Dec 31, 2007 6:38 PM, Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com> wrote:
>> The commit below implements an initial prototype of the "expected
>> failures" enhancement described in STDCXX-683. The prototype can
>> be viewed on the usual test result page:
>> http://people.apache.org/~sebor/stdcxx/results/builds
>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=607788&view=rev
>>
>> The new file, etc/config/xfail.txt, is intended to contain a list
>> of known failures in the test suite (including examples and locales).
>> The comments in the file explain how to make a failure in a component
>> as expected.
>>
>> Let me know what you all think: questions, suggestions for changes,
>> or bug reports are all welcome!
>>
>> Happy new year!
>> Martin
>>
>> PS I've tested the changes with build logs on most platforms but I
>> forgot to include Windows. As usual, things are different there and
>> the results aren't quite satisfactory. I'll work on fixing those as
>> soon as I get a chance.
>>
>
Re: prototype of the "expected failures" enhancement (STDCXX-683)
Posted by Mark Brown <ma...@gmail.com>.
Martin,
Most of the links to the log files are broken. They all point to files
in http://people.apache.org/tmp/. Also, I'm not sure I understand how
rows in the tables are supposed to be arranged now. If I recall, they
used to be ordered alphabetically but after your change 26 comes
before 23, and 23 before 27. Is that intended?
2 26.class.gslice 46230 162
5 23.deque.special 61465 1536
7 27_basic_ios 0 1
-- Mark
On Dec 31, 2007 6:38 PM, Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com> wrote:
> The commit below implements an initial prototype of the "expected
> failures" enhancement described in STDCXX-683. The prototype can
> be viewed on the usual test result page:
> http://people.apache.org/~sebor/stdcxx/results/builds
>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=607788&view=rev
>
> The new file, etc/config/xfail.txt, is intended to contain a list
> of known failures in the test suite (including examples and locales).
> The comments in the file explain how to make a failure in a component
> as expected.
>
> Let me know what you all think: questions, suggestions for changes,
> or bug reports are all welcome!
>
> Happy new year!
> Martin
>
> PS I've tested the changes with build logs on most platforms but I
> forgot to include Windows. As usual, things are different there and
> the results aren't quite satisfactory. I'll work on fixing those as
> soon as I get a chance.
>